The obser 2. Photographic method. I shall discuss the first only. vations most easily made (and any one is valuable) are given below in the order of difficulty: 1. The number of meteors that fall in a given interval; e. g., in one minute, in ten minutes, etc. 2. Color, both of meteor and its train. 3. Velocity, i. e., swift or slow. "No. of meteor" means here the number of the individual in the series. It will be observed that columns one and six of form II furnish all the information that form I does. In case meteors are falling so fast that all observations cannot be recorded, in form II leave any column blank except columns one and six. The path of the meteor is more difficult to record, and by the visual method is cer 4. Brightness as compared with Jupiter, tainly inaccurate. The observer sets the or some fixed star. map referred to on an easel before him, fixes 5. Time of its appearance or disappear in his mind the path relative to the brighter stars in its neighborhood, and plots it into the map on the easel. An arrow may indi. cate the direction in which the meteor is moving. Let the line of the path be produced backward with a little lighter stroke. It will be found that a great number of these lines will intersect in nearly the same point. This point is called the "radiant," and is fixed in the sky relative to the stars. Let now each path be numbered so as to correspond to the numbers in form II. It will be seen that this furnishes a tolerably complete record of the meteor's activity. figure on the following page shows the paths of eighty-three meteors, observed by Alexander S. Herschel in 1866, and plotted in the way I have described. The This method seems crude at first but it is the one recently employed by Professor Schoeberle, until recently acting director of Lick Observatory, for the August meteors, and very similar to the one proposed by Director Pickering of Harvard College Observatory. The shower of November 13 should be more brilliant after midnight than before. I have spoken only of the November showers. There are a great number of meteoric showers; all have many character Form II. Brightness. Velocity. Time of Appearance. istics in common. All are named from the constellation in which their radiant is found; e. g., the shower of November 13 is called the shower of the Leonids. The other more brilliant showers are: The Perseids of August 10, Andromedes of November 26, the Geminids of December 7, the Lyrids of April 18 and the Orionids of October 19. During the next three years investigation in meteoric astronomy, will be very active and doubtless fruitful. More will be known the Leonids are moving in the same path as Temple's comet. Then, again, the meteor is invisible until it enters our atmosphere. Hence, if we could ascertain at what height it becomes visible, we could fix a minimum depth for our atmosphere-a question now puzzling not only astronomers but geologists and me of the nature of meteors, and, perhaps, the | teorologists. To determine the height of question as to whether they come from outside the solar system or are parts of the solar system that have been neglected in its making may be provisionally answered. If the former hypothesis is true and we can determine what materials the meteors are made of, we can answer two questions. The first, that the immense space between Neptune and the nearest fixed star is not empty as was once supposed, the second, how nearly the composition of bodies outside the solar system is the same as that of our earth. meteor it must be observed by two observers at stations separated by considerable distance. Professor W. H. Pickering of Harvard calculated heights of two meteors that fell during the Leonid shower of the last year, and which he and his assistants observed in the manner which I have described. The calculations showed that one appeared at the height of 406 miles, the other at a height of 182 miles. He adds, however: "I place little confidence in the values of the heights at which these meteors FOLLOWING Mr. Henderson's suggestion in the August EDUCATOR that teachers studying "Social Elements" should write out a list of social problems, because "those which the student formulates for himself will have for him the highest educational value," it occurred to me to make a list of the social problems that confront the teacher in the school-room. These problems fall readily into three classes: (1) Problems concerning the relations among the children. The public school is essentially a democratic institution and the I-am-better-than-thou spirit has no place there. But do not teachers in every school find it hard to keep such a spirit out? Is it not often the case that the poorer children who do not dress as well as their more fortunate companions, and do not belong to the same social "set," are made very uncomfortable by the snubbing they receive from their classmates, children who are too young for judgment to rule their feelings, and who often act from thoughtlessness rather than from malice? Does not the teacher herself unconsciously make a distinction in her treatment of the children? Has she not here a glorious opportunity to inspire her pupils with a democratic spirit which is supposed to be the foundation of our republic? Outside of school, parents sometime find it difficult to regulate the relations of their children in this respect. Children are so imitative that association with those less refined may have a harmful influence and parents feel that until their children's characters are formed the harm to them overbalances the good influence they might exert on others. But no such difficulty as this meets the teacher in the school-room. There all pupil's are under the same control, engaged in the same occupations, and there is no room for distinctions of any kind. Another problem under this head concerns the social life of children who are in school. Of late years the age at which boys and girls begin to have social gatherings of their own has greatly lowered, and, in high schools at least, the problem is often a serious one. The children come to school tired out from their dissipation of the evening before, and inclined to think over and to talk over the good time they have had rather than attend to their lessons. While it is very true that "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy," it is also true that growing boys and girls cannot indulge in late hours with impunity. All their time and strength are needed to perform properly their schoolduties and to obtain the needed amount of fresh air and exercise. Evening dancing parties cannot be suitable substitutes for the latter. It may seem at first sight that this matter is entirely under the control of the parents, but it affects the teacher so vitally that she certainly ought to have some voice and influence in the matter, and to use what she has. (2) Problems concerning the relations of pupil and teacher.-This of course includes the whole problem of government and discipline. What principle is to guide the teacher in her government of the school? How is she to avoid the feeling which I think most children have, though they may not formulate it, that discipline is a game between the teacher and pupils, a trial of skill in which the cleverer comes out ahead? It is the teachers' business to see that good order is enforced. If they can outwit her, the victory is theirs. So children who would be horrified at the idea of telling or acting a lie outside of school, or of proving false to a trust, have no conscience whatever, apparently, about their behavior in school. They have no feeling that the teacher has their best good at heart in her attempts to enforce order, no feeling that any trust is imposed in them, and alas! too often there is not. When a child feels that he is not trusted, that he is watched every instant, how can there help but be aroused in him the spirit of combat, the impulse to assert his own independence, and show his cleverness in outwitting their constant supervision? Miss Kennedy in her article in the October EDUCATOR, pointed out the evil influence this spirit has on future citizens. But will it not have a harmful influence on their whole moral character? Though the children may maintain for a time their higher standard of honor outside of school, how can twelve years of systematic deceit and evasion of authority help but have an influence in the end? Yet, if supervision is removed, there will always be some mean spirits who will take advantage of their liberty and make themselves an annoyance to the lawabiding pupils. The solution, it seems to me, lies in some such method as that outlined in the October EDUCATOR, in making the children themselves responsible and giving them power to protect themselves against those who are not yet ready for liberty. One mistake that teachers make too often even in these days, is expecting too much from a pupil in the way of order. Pupils cannot sit in a school-room six hours a day and sit absolutely still all of that time. A certain amount of communication is necessary, and a few minutes of relaxation and chat between classes is a welcome rest and diversion, and they turn to the next duty with minds refreshed. The guiding principle in the whole matter seems to me to be the same as that of all republics: to each individual should be granted the largest liberty consistent with the liberty of others. Another problem which is exactly analogous to the one just spoken of, is that of dishonest work. The same feeling that he is playing a game often makes a pupil congratulate himself that he has made the teacher believe he knows more than he really does. The teacher's problem is how to inspire indifferent pupils with a love of study, to make them see the value of such study to themselves. (3) Problems concerning the relation of parent and teacher.-How can either teachers or par ents do the best by the child unless they understand something of each other's purpose and ways of working? How many mutual misunderstandings and hostile feelings might be averted by a friendly talk between parent and teacher? In how many ways the teacher's work would be helped by the cooperation of the parent? Take for example the question spoken of before-that of children's social life outside of school. It is a question that vitally affects the teacher, but she has little hope of any solution without the cooperation of the parents. Mothers' and teachers' meetings are at present in many places the solution of this difficulty. Though they are still largely experimental in their methods, it cannot be doubted that they will ultimately become of great benefit. Such are some of the social problems which confront the teacher in the schoolroom. But there is another class of such problems in which it is her duty to exert an influence. The purpose of a public school education is to fit the child to play his part in the various institutions of social activity. In his relations to home, church, and the industrial world the teacher exerts a powerful, though indirect influence. But in the child's present relations to the state, the teacher can exert a direct and practical influence. The relations of the school-boy or school-girl and the state concern mainly their behavior on the streets and in public buildings. The teacher can see that her pupils do not annoy passers-by on their way to and from school, can form among them a Good Citizenship League such as exists in Philadelphia, whose special purpose is to see that each member refrains "from throwing paper, bits of fruit, or any refuse whatever into the streets or any other public place, and also refrains from injuring or defacing property, and observes city ordinances." This should be done by inspiring in the pupils a pride in the appearance of their own streets and public buildings. FORT WAYNE, IND. IN FAMILIAR TALKS ON READING.-II. I. By CHAS. M. CURRY. N the last number of THE EDUCATOR I pointed out in a somewhat detailed way simple exercises designed to bring home to the minds of the children the spirit of Whittier's little poem In School-Days. The point to be insisted upon in all such work is that it must not degenerate into formality. The form of the question or the completeness of the answer are important matters, but the vital thing is that the mind should follow the natural order of the poet's method. To that end I would by no means insist upon complete statements in answer to simple questions. Thus, if in talking about the poem mentioned, these questions should be asked: What was the little girl doing? and What does this action indicate? the natural, and in the true sense, complete answers would be "Fingering her checked apron,' and "Embarrassment," rather than "The little girl was fingering her checked apron," and, "This action shows that the little girl was embarrassed." To insist upon the latter form of answer distracts attention from the thing said to the manner of saying it, and results in breaking the continuity of the reader's thought. Besides, these answers are contrary to the method of actual life and a waste often of valuable time and energy. I am not insisting that anything savoring of incoherent thought and expression shall be allowed to pass without attention, but simply that the futile maxim "Always insist upon complete answers" shall be relegated to the scrap pile of worn-out pedagogical dogmas, and that its place be taken by the more reasonable thought that complete statements are to be required when some useful end is to be served thereby. II. No doubt many readers of my first article are wondering why nothing was said about oral reading. Is it of no importance? Are we simply to spend our recitation period discussing the meaning of the poem? Oral expression has a very large and important |